* Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote:
> On 09/23/2015 11:18 AM, Kam Lasater wrote:
> > At this point not having one is borderline negligent. I'd suggest:
> > Github Issues, Pivotal Tracker or Redmine (probably in that order).
> > There are tens to hundreds of other great ones out there, I'm sure one
> > of them would also work.
> First, understand that the Postgres project was created before bug
> trackers existed. And people are very slow to change their habits,
> especially since not having a bug tracker was actually a benefit up
> until around 2005.  It's not anymore, but I'm sure people will argue
> with my statement on that.
> We have to use something OSS; open source projects depending on
> closed-source infra is bad news.  Out of what's available, I'd actually
> choose Bugzilla; as much as BZ frustrates the heck out of me at times,
> it's the only OSS tracker that's at all sophisticated.
> The alternative would be someone building a sophisticated system on top
> of RequestTracker, which would also let us have tight mailing list
> integration given RT's email-driven model.  However, that would require
> someone with the time to build a custom workflow system and web UI on
> top of RT.  It's quite possible that Best Practical would be willing to
> help here.

Yeah, even if we got past the "do we want a bug tracker?" question, any
project would probably end up stalling indefinitely on "well then, which

In the end, we should probably just throw something up based on whatever
the folks who are going to be actually maintaining it want and call it a
'beta' and see what happens with it.  The above-referenced individuals
would be the bug tracking system curators, of course.  Unless it's got
serious technical issues, the infrastructure team will do our best to
support the choice.  On the other hand, some of us would likely be
involved in bug curation also.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to